3 year GCSE courses

I am amazed your school fitted in academic lessons into its PE timetable for years 7-9, cantkeepawayforever. I have not heard of any schools fitting in 18 subjects plus enough time in the timetable for classroom PE lessons during the normal state school length of day. I also wonder at your peculiar dismissal of the huge range of entirely free musical opportunities offered in a school - which also runs both GCSE and BTEC music., I am not actually inspired at the thought of quite such an overcrowded timetable of compulsory subjects. Two compulsory mfl for almost all, for example - why? And why no alternative for those who don't want it, if you are so keen on breadth and not depth? Fwiw, creative/practical subjects are hugely popular at my children's school, and there is no lack of opportunity or provision for those interested. It's a large school, so plenty of new subjects on offer in KS4, both BTEC and GCSE. Also, plenty of time in the school curriculum for developing other skills, outside of the timetabled academic lessons.

Walkaround,

They did PE - as in weekly games etc lessons - but they didn't study PE, if that makes sense?

Y9 was still very much about studying PE, as a foundation for the GCSE if taken - multiple different sports, lots of focus on teaching and developing skills, some of the underlying biology, psychology etc - whereas Y10 and Y11, for those not doing the GCSE, were very much focused on providing opportunities to keep fit and healthy through being able to choose the sports and activities they would enjoy for life.

I think it is very easy to be sidetracked into personal examples of how our own children made choices - for example of extracurricular activities or skills we ourselves have taught them - that kept their particular education reasonably broad.

Ofsted's brief - and that of educators - is to ensure a breadth of in-school education for all, for as long as possible.

As I say, in DC's school, the vast majority of pupils from every background study 17 subjects plus PHSCE (which yes, includes financial planning, first aid etc etc) in Y7, and 18 [I forgot computing] in Y8 and Y9 after taking up a second MFL. A small number don't do the second MFL and so remain at 17.

It is that breadth - 17 / 18 subjects for every child, no matter what their parents can supplement or not at home or in extra-curricular clubs - of full 3 year courses that seems to me to be valuable.

They then do 10, plus the obvious non-examined work in PE, PSHCE etc, and again of course anything they do extracurricularly (2 further MFLs, a further PE option and Further Maths are offered as after school courses) for the final 2 years. Mine didn't take up new subjects such as business, but those are of course available.

Dc ( now year 12) did a mixture of 3, 2 and 1 year gcses
Finished with 11 gcses . 1 from year 9, 2 from year 10 and 8 from year 11.
Sort of mad.. sort of worked

Are you telling me your children were allowed to give up PE in years 10 and 11, cantkeepawayforever?! Surely that's not allowed?

My dses carried on with music and drama through school clubs/productions/orchestras/bands/choirs open to all. All students in year 9 do humanities/philosophy lessons (not part of any GCSE course, but ensuring KS3 syllabus is not cut short for those giving up 1 or 2 humanities). One of my children also chose to continue with 3 humanities, another with 2. One child continued with 1 MFL, the other took up a 2nd MFL in year 9. Obviously both continued with maths, English and the 3 sciences. One also took computer science and business studies. Both loathed art and were ecstatic to give it up after 9 years of art and crafts through primary and secondary - I think they knew by then they were not interested in pursuing it. Opting to give up tech subjects was a shame, I think, but with 3 different tech subjects to cover in a year, in reality the extra year of this would not have given them a huge amount of extra exposure, and I have taught them basic textiles, knitting skills and cooking skills at home, so really only mssing out on resistant materials. IT skills continue to be taught in the school in year 9 through cross curricular planning. And the kids get taught things like First Aid skills, financial planning, etc. So I do not in all honesty think they are missing anything significant and they have effectively taken up 2 new subjects as options and only really given up art (with great pleasure) and DT (although one ds was tempted by a DT option not even offered in KS3, but in the end favoured another new subject, so either way was not missing out on a subject that interested him as a result of a shortened KS3). Given the humanities/philosophy course that all students do, they could in any event have chosen fewer humanities for GCSE and opted for more creative/practical GCSEs instead, had they wanted to.

Mine did 13 subjects in Y9 but kept all of them through to Y11, which worked well for them. So instead of 17 + 2x10 they did 3x13. Similar but they liked being able to do the subjects they enjoyed in more depth. Going from 17 to 10 feels more drastic - mine have had to make decisions a year earlier but I think it was probably easier as they didn't have to give up so many.

Walkaround, in Y9, my DCs studied:

• English
• Maths
• All 3 sciences
• 3 different DT subjects
• Art
• Music
• Drama
• PE
• 3 different humanities
• 2 different MFL

So 17 different subjects (plus obviously PSHCE)

Are you genuinely telling me that in the first year of a 3 year GCSE course, pupils study 17 subjects??

In Y10 and 11, the above shrank to

• Maths
• English
• 3 sciences
• 2 humanities (DS) or 1 humanity (DD)
• 2 MFL
• Art + 1 DT subject (DD) Music (DS)

That's a whole 7 subjects fewer?

Both ds's and dd's schools only offer 1 language throughout the school to everyone anyway as they havn't got the teachers/numbers to run more.

Ds had a completely free choice of subjects in his 2 year GCSE's. As long as he chose at least 2 science plus one out of either history, geography, language or computer science his other choices were completely free. he could choose an extra science, or another humanity or 1/2 arts/technology subjects.

Don't think that variety would be possible without adopting the 3yr gcse plan so I prefer it for that reason. I think my DC would have really struggled with choosing / dropping subjects if they were only doing 9 in total.

My DC school seems to use 3 yr GCSEs as a way of keeping the curriculum as open as possible until Y11 - they do 8 or 9 compulsory GCSEs depending on double or triple science, and then any four options from a list of GCSEs and bye s. Plus Welsh Bacc. Top 2 sets maths do additional maths if they want.

cantkeepawayforever - I find it dispiriting and wrong that so many schools doing 2-year GCSEs restrict choices to a single MFL (if that), a single humanity and Science, English and maths, but it seems to me that will happen more, not less, often, if there is a blanket ban on 3-year GCSEs.

It can be hard to distinguish between 'Y9 work' and 'GCSE work' in many subjects, though.

Language vocabulary, for example, or science content, or music composition / performance, or art skills - it's not always clear exactly where 'GCSE courses' start.

I don't have a huge issue with schools starting such GCSE material in Y9, as long as no subjects are dropped - it's the restriction of the curriculum to English, Maths, Science, a single humanity, a single MFL (if that) and precious little else that I find dispiriting and wrong.

Interestingly, while the comprejhensive DD and DS went to has always done 2 year GCSE courses (and has a real 'thing' about breadth of curriculum, so much so that it still offers 5 'true' option blocks for GCSEs,. all with a range of subjects in - so not History vs Geography, but languages in 2 or 3 blocks, music in a couple, art in almost all, humanities in several each, so that whatever a child wants to do can usually be accommodated), suyperselective grammar has until recently done 3 year courses. It has now switched to 2 year courses, presumably worried about what Ofsted might say about a school in which, despite very high attaining pupils, the curriculum offering was dramatically restricted from the end of Y8 (take up of creative and DT subjects is very low).

2 year gcse course here (highly successful comprehensive) except for languages. One is dropped at the end of year 8 so some gcse language content is taught in year 9.

I’m glad dd chose her options at the end of year 9, by that point she knew better what she wanted to do and also her friendship group completely changed during yr 9 and she’s ended up in a nicer crowd all doing the same GCSEs.

Both my kids schools do 2 year GCSEs and both change teachers for some subjects between years 10 & 11

As long as we are still working there we stay with the group @TeenPlusTwenties for the 3 years.

I know some subjects at my school do start on the GCSE spec from day 1 of yr9 but in my subject we don't but cover basics that are subject specific without specs in mind which allows for deeper thinking/understanding when starting qualification specific content - this I will miss if/when we return to a 2 year

They often keep the same teacher but sometimes teachers leave so it's not guaranteed. Our school seems to have problems finding and retaining teachers in certain subjects.

That is, of course, unless they change set in a subject.

TeenPlusTwenties - yes, they do keep the same teacher.

For those doing 3 year courses, do they keep the same teacher for all 3 years?
Our school does 2 year and aims to keep the same teachers wherever possible.

At my DS’s school they chose options in Yr8 and have started on track towards GCSE work in Yr9 dropping subjects they are not studying to GCSE level or equivalent. It’s been quite a soft start and I’d say that the homework hasn’t been as intense as Yr8 so far.

As they take 10 subjects the only academic subject he’s dropped is Geography. He’s doing English x 2, Science x2, 2 languages, History, RE (compulsory at the school), Maths and Music. I do think it might have been nice to continue with Drama, Art and Product Design etc. for another year and it was a shame to drop Geography. However, it’s a broader range of subjects than I was able to opt to do in the 80s when 8 was the max so it doesn’t feel like he is missing out.

Neither of my children’s schools do a 3 year KS4 although science content is begun in year 9. I’m glad of that. Dd in particular had to drop history and geography in order to accommodate her other subject choices and I’m glad she had the extra year of humanities study.

However one of the things ds’s previous school did which I am in favour of was partial options. At the end of year 8 students can choose to drop certain art/technology subjects (they still have to do at least 2, or to begin a second language. Then proper options are chosen at the end of year 9.

I am not specifically talking about my school . More about my observations of what English has become like across many schools. This seems to be much more of a pedagogical battleground than maths or science. It's an interpretation if what the teaching if English looks like from years 7 to 11 which is very different from what it was 15 years ago.

@Teachermaths I wouldn’t know. Just know DD’s school is getting amazing results and praise from all sides so whatever they’re doing is working for the children in our area. Results wise and progress 8 wise they beat all other local schools.

Of course if ofsted decide to mark down schools that are achieving great things just because they choose 3 year GCSE’s (even though it can be shown that in that particular school a 3 year course works well), that would further enforce my opinion that ofsted are more keen on their own agenda than what benefits children. Just a thought of course.

Leadership as in leadership telling you that you must teach that way (ie badly)? One thing that is notable about my ds' school is the level of support leadership have from staff. I am a governor in one school, work in another and know quite a few teachers, so get to hear quite a lot of opinions about schools in the locality, and staff at ds' school are genuinely supportive of the leadership team there, and feel supported and listened to by their leadership team. I do think that makes a colossal difference. The school also got 99% of parents responding in the Ofsted Parentview questionnaire that they would recommend it to other parents.

It's not really bad teaching, though walkaround so much as leadership.